Mon, August 01, 2022

UKAD v Anthony De Luca

A decision in the matter of UK Anti-Doping (UKAD) v Anthony De Luca has been published by the National Anti-Doping Panel (NADP).

On 26 September 2021, Mr Anthony De Luca, a Professional ice hockey player, provided a urine Sample In-Competition. The Sample returned an Adverse Analytical Finding (AAF) for carboxy-THC, a metabolite of Δ9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC), the psychoactive compound found in cannabis.

Mr De Luca was subsequently charged on 21 December 2021, with a breach of ADR Articles 2.1 for the Presence of a Prohibited Substance or its Metabolites or Markers in his Sample, and ​2.2 for Use or Attempted Use by an Athlete of a Prohibited Substance or a Prohibited Method. Mr De Luca admitted the Anti-Doping Rule Violation (ADRV) in relation to ADR Article 2.1 but denied the ADRV pursuant to Article 2.2, as he asserted that the AAF resulted from his Out-of-Competition Use of cannabis , and therefore he should receive a reduced period of Ineligibility pursuant to ADR Article 10.2.4. The NADP Tribunal, consisting of Charles Hollander QC ​(Chair), Colin Murdock and Professor Brian Lunn found Mr De Luca had committed the ADRV in relation to ADR Articles 2.1 but ADR Article 2.2 was not proven. A period of Ineligibility of three months was imposed which commenced on 21 June 2022.

A copy of the full decision can be accessed via the related documents tab on the right-hand side.

The National Anti-Doping Panel (NADP) is the United Kingdom’s independent tribunal responsible for adjudicating anti-doping disputes in sport. It is operated by Sport Resolutions and is entirely independent of UK Anti-Doping who is responsible for investigating, charging and prosecuting cases before the NADP.

Related Documents

• UKAD v Anthony De LucaDecision
• UKAD v Anthony De LucaDecision
• UKAD v Anthony De LucaDecision
• UKAD v Anthony De LucaDecision
• UKAD v Anthony De LucaDecision
• UKAD v Anthony De LucaDecision
• UKAD v Anthony De LucaDecision
• UKAD v Anthony De LucaDecision
• UKAD v Anthony De LucaDecision
• UKAD v Anthony De LucaDecision
• UKAD v Anthony De LucaDecision
• UKAD v Anthony De LucaDecision
• UKAD v Anthony De LucaDecision
• UKAD v Anthony De LucaDecision